K Umesh vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 February, 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ICARNATAKA AT 

DATED THIS THE 51% DAY 09 FEBRUARY    

PRESENEW*»

THE I~ION'I-3I,.E MR.JUSTICE.»°v§(:;%u:A{)]§'AL;iS; 


THE HONBLE :'h{R.JUS'Pf'$I§VVVA,S.B(5}3"ANI$fA
WRIT PETYFIOI§fN(j;'94:25J_.2_C3O_$.  - KAT)

BETWEEN: '
KUMESH 53/ ogsm ii,SEETH'AR}kMA,  '

AGED ABOUT '38:;YEAR3,  .. " 
woaxmc}'4Lt1§':r.D;'§:,"-  

IN THE oFFICE_-- 0§* "2?HE._PI1t.irec2PAL,

CHIEF 'CO'NSERVATQR ,0';-.'.. VFWQREZSTS,

(WILDLIFE) ARAi'--!._YA«. BBAXIAIQ,

MALLESHWARAM,-_  

BAN(.1AI,0RE.   * '- ...PETI'I'I()NER

" V'  --A{BY-~S:R:»1.'§'AssEn; . 33:), 'mg KARNATAKA
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL} 'As __PEfR " 1. ANNEXURE-A,
CONSEQUENTIALLY _...ALLOW  'THE- APPLICATION
NO.23'78/ 2003. FILED BY T512: .0 PE-'i'!.TI01*-EAER BY QUASHING
ANNEXURE-A_8 }1;::--r;,EI:s ?_BEFORE" "*F--HE KAR DATED
05.03.2003 i=~A3.S:*:.::3_VBY«.fmE.R2.  

Iffhis  Comihg on for orders this day,
Gopalaiiowtla VJ.',._Ijmad§"the f0IIOWing:-

002033

  SfI..3,VA"'#!¢eIappa, learned Addifional Government

Aci?.I002ité"_'t0 éééépt netice on behaif of respondents No.1

1:0   "fie is permitted to file: meme: 0f appearance

I I    period 0f four weeks from today.

 2. The learned Counsel for the petitimtier

I  '"s:1bmit;s that on a s 011: int, this writ petition is



3
requires to be allowed as the impugned order is passed

by the Kamataka Administrative Tribunal, Bangaiere
(for short the 'I'ribuna1') without hearing the petitioner's
counsel. Therefore, we have acceded to the 

made by the learned Counsei for the petitio:-fiat.'     A

3. Heard the learned   

and ieamed Addl. Government :4AciVoeate.»'toA 

the matter on merits.

  "be---.seer1'v~by'§the order impugned in

this   Jhahs dismissed the application

fer the it   despite ganting stdficient

 '~  _   ~le31'i16CI COUIISCI for the petitioner did

  set' and argue the original application en

Ii:efits._ . i ' 71 

"  In em' considered view, having regard to the

  made by the petitioner in reseeet of the public

. K   gfinpiemezitation, we feel that it is just and proper to five

one more opportunity to the petitioner. Therefore, we

K\t/



set aside the order impugned in this writ petition by

a}lowing Writ petition. Hence, Issue Rule.

6. The matter is remitted back to the 

with a direction to examine the matter O1'I'e4'I__}l'1€':I_'iE1:$l'  

hearing the learned Counsel §fei'"'t11e'l--,  

dispose of the same as expeditiei1sl'y'i_as  ll 

stated by the learned Ceunselifor tl1e'  he V'

had the benefit of   stiehlvthe same
will remain in opera13'e:a'7     aside of the

order.    _ petitioxz.
Aeeardingl}f_,."tl1e fiézfitlpetitien is allowed.

 .....  

Judge

§df-33
Eedéé

ll hzpfvskfbme